Stacking

Blog: From The Director

December 19, 2014

Many in the interscholastic tennis community of this state have complained for years about the unethical practices of a small number of coaches who “stack” their lineups so that their better players compete in lower flights to increase their chances of success in advancing and earning points for their teams.

The current meet scoring system, which fails to reward teams for placing players at the highest levels, invites the problem. Appealing to personal integrity works with most coaches, but not all; so the issue of stacking festers, and it frustrates many coaches.

Hearing this pain, in 2009 the MHSAA convened a group of tennis coaches to discuss stacking. We utilized a paid professional facilitator. One obvious outcome was very little support to solve the problem by restructuring the tennis meet scoring system to disincentivize stacking.

The simple solution – to modify the meet scoring system to provide more team points for Number 1 singles than Number 2, and for Number 2 more than Number 3, etc. – was a double fault with the clear majority of the coaches assembled in 2009.

Of course, simple solutions rarely are so simple. And with this scoring system solution comes the likelihood that stronger teams move even further out of reach of their challengers. Other critics are uncomfortable with giving one student-athlete a higher potential team point value than another.

If those and other objections are the prevailing sentiment, then a new scoring system won’t be in our future. And stacking still will be.

Officiating’s High Calling

October 28, 2016

One of the sports world’s better wordsmiths is Referee Magazine publisher Barry Mano. He’s also a fine thinker, as these artful lines demonstrated at the 2016 Officiating Industry Luncheon in San Antonio:

“Let me provide, in all subjectivity, some observations about our environment, about our fellow citizens. We are:

“More generous but less forgiving.
More open but less discriminating with that openness.
More informed but less knowledgeable.
More litigious but less willing to abide by the rules.
Quick to seek an expert opinion, then just as quick to get a second opinion, one that agrees with ours.”

Barry is president of the National Association of Sports Officials (NASO) which helps contest officials at all levels aspire to be discriminating and knowledgeable adjudicators of fair and healthy competitive athletics.

At a time when the number of registered officials with the Michigan High School Athletic Association has sunk to a 30-year low, Barry’s words are a clarion call to young men and women of character to consider sports officiating as an avocation, or even vocation, that will enrich their lives immensely.

Search